Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 18th Aug 2006 12:16 UTC, submitted by Katri Nayan
GNU, GPL, Open Source Gus Robertson, vice president of Red Hat Asia-Pacific said open source has helped lower the cost of IT but there are far more strategic reasons for choosing open-source software over proprietary competitors. However, Dion Wiggins, research director and vice president of Gartner in Hong Kong, advised businesses against having a strategy specifically for open source.
Thread beginning with comment 153626
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
On thing missed
by amadensor on Fri 18th Aug 2006 15:08 UTC
amadensor
Member since:
2006-04-10

When evaluating open source, you must remeber one advantage that every article seems to skip. The product cannot die, and you are not tied to one vendor.

If you are willing to pay for it, and you will be if the software is important to your business, you can get someone to do patches and maintenance, even if the original developer cuts support. You can also go somewhere else if they try to overcharge you. This may not mean much to a home user, but it can be huge in the enterprise, where you need business continuity, and generally have the resources to hire someone.

Reply Score: 5

RE: On thing missed
by Cloudy on Fri 18th Aug 2006 15:36 in reply to "On thing missed"
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

When evaluating open source, you must remeber one advantage that every article seems to skip. The product cannot die, and you are not tied to one vendor.

Open source projects die all the time.

While you can, in theory, pay someone to take over maintenance of a dead project, in practice, that goes against the supposed lower cost of ownership of open source.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: On thing missed
by Buffalo Soldier on Fri 18th Aug 2006 18:23 in reply to "RE: On thing missed"
Buffalo Soldier Member since:
2005-07-06

Open source projects die all the time.

While you can, in theory, pay someone to take over maintenance of a dead project, in practice, that goes against the supposed lower cost of ownership of open source.


At least with Free & OpenSource Software you have the option to do that (without the previous "vendor" crying foul).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: On thing missed
by butters on Sat 19th Aug 2006 04:48 in reply to "RE: On thing missed"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

Open source projects die all the time.

Right, but not the kind of open source projects that enterprise IT has been using. Projects like SymphonyOS could die at any moment. Projects like Apache will be in active development for the forseeable future. In fact I'd bet that Apache outlives IIS.

Once an open source project reaches the maturity required to run in an enterprise environment, it's reached critical mass. The product will continue in one way or another, no matter what happens. For example, when David Dawes changed the license for XFree86, it was immediately forked and continued as Xorg, with more commercial backing than before.

And, as the above poster says, buying/funding support for an inactive OSS project is cheaper than buying support for an EOLed proprietary software product.

Reply Parent Score: 5